Cargando…

Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature

Aortic arch repair is a challenging intervention. Open surgical repair is still considered the gold standard, but in high-risk patients, it is not always a reasonable option, making endovascular approaches an enticing, when not the only available, alternative for treatment. The strategies more commo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scurto, Lucia, Peluso, Nicolò, Pascucci, Federico, Sica, Simona, De Nigris, Francesca, Filipponi, Marco, Minelli, Fabrizio, Donati, Tommaso, Tinelli, Giovanni, Tshomba, Yamume
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9410239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36013228
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12081279
_version_ 1784775045771427840
author Scurto, Lucia
Peluso, Nicolò
Pascucci, Federico
Sica, Simona
De Nigris, Francesca
Filipponi, Marco
Minelli, Fabrizio
Donati, Tommaso
Tinelli, Giovanni
Tshomba, Yamume
author_facet Scurto, Lucia
Peluso, Nicolò
Pascucci, Federico
Sica, Simona
De Nigris, Francesca
Filipponi, Marco
Minelli, Fabrizio
Donati, Tommaso
Tinelli, Giovanni
Tshomba, Yamume
author_sort Scurto, Lucia
collection PubMed
description Aortic arch repair is a challenging intervention. Open surgical repair is still considered the gold standard, but in high-risk patients, it is not always a reasonable option, making endovascular approaches an enticing, when not the only available, alternative for treatment. The strategies more commonly adopted are surgical supra-aortic trunk (SAT) rerouting followed by deployment of a standard thoracic endoprosthesis, chimney techniques, custom-made scalloped, fenestrated, and branched devices, and in situ or physician-modified fenestrations. If we excluded techniques involving SAT rerouting where the arch anatomy is surgically modified in order to make deployment in the aortic arch of a standard thoracic endoprosthesis possible, in the other techniques, one or more SATs are incorporated in the thoracic endoprosthesis. In these cases, no matter what solution is adopted, because of the morphology of the aorta at this level, achieving an ideal sealing is extremely difficult, and endovascular treatments of the arch are burdened by an increased risk of type IA endoleaks. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. We identified 1277 records. After reading titles, abstracts, and full texts, we excluded 1231 records. Exclusion criteria were low-quality evidence, abstracts, case reports, conference presentations, reviews, editorials, and expert opinions. A total of 48 studies were included, for a total of 3114 patients. A type IA endoleak occurred in 248 patients (7.7%) with a mean incidence of 18.8% in chimney procedures, 4.8% and 3%, respectively, in fenestrated and branched devices, and 2.2% in in situ fenestration. We excluded from our analysis scalloped technology that is used when the target vessel originates from a healthy landing zone and represents a different anatomical setting. Type IA endoleaks are a concern with all types of endovascular aortic arch repair, and they can compromise the outcomes of the procedure. The rate of type IA endoleaks appears to be significantly higher in chimney procedures. In order to maximize sealing, whenever possible, endovascular repair of the arch should be achieved with custom-made fenestrated devices. However, chimney configurations are still a valuable solution particularly in the emergency setting, although in such a procedure, to guarantee accurate postoperative management and follow-up, an imaging protocol could be useful.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9410239
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94102392022-08-26 Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature Scurto, Lucia Peluso, Nicolò Pascucci, Federico Sica, Simona De Nigris, Francesca Filipponi, Marco Minelli, Fabrizio Donati, Tommaso Tinelli, Giovanni Tshomba, Yamume J Pers Med Review Aortic arch repair is a challenging intervention. Open surgical repair is still considered the gold standard, but in high-risk patients, it is not always a reasonable option, making endovascular approaches an enticing, when not the only available, alternative for treatment. The strategies more commonly adopted are surgical supra-aortic trunk (SAT) rerouting followed by deployment of a standard thoracic endoprosthesis, chimney techniques, custom-made scalloped, fenestrated, and branched devices, and in situ or physician-modified fenestrations. If we excluded techniques involving SAT rerouting where the arch anatomy is surgically modified in order to make deployment in the aortic arch of a standard thoracic endoprosthesis possible, in the other techniques, one or more SATs are incorporated in the thoracic endoprosthesis. In these cases, no matter what solution is adopted, because of the morphology of the aorta at this level, achieving an ideal sealing is extremely difficult, and endovascular treatments of the arch are burdened by an increased risk of type IA endoleaks. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. We identified 1277 records. After reading titles, abstracts, and full texts, we excluded 1231 records. Exclusion criteria were low-quality evidence, abstracts, case reports, conference presentations, reviews, editorials, and expert opinions. A total of 48 studies were included, for a total of 3114 patients. A type IA endoleak occurred in 248 patients (7.7%) with a mean incidence of 18.8% in chimney procedures, 4.8% and 3%, respectively, in fenestrated and branched devices, and 2.2% in in situ fenestration. We excluded from our analysis scalloped technology that is used when the target vessel originates from a healthy landing zone and represents a different anatomical setting. Type IA endoleaks are a concern with all types of endovascular aortic arch repair, and they can compromise the outcomes of the procedure. The rate of type IA endoleaks appears to be significantly higher in chimney procedures. In order to maximize sealing, whenever possible, endovascular repair of the arch should be achieved with custom-made fenestrated devices. However, chimney configurations are still a valuable solution particularly in the emergency setting, although in such a procedure, to guarantee accurate postoperative management and follow-up, an imaging protocol could be useful. MDPI 2022-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9410239/ /pubmed/36013228 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12081279 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Scurto, Lucia
Peluso, Nicolò
Pascucci, Federico
Sica, Simona
De Nigris, Francesca
Filipponi, Marco
Minelli, Fabrizio
Donati, Tommaso
Tinelli, Giovanni
Tshomba, Yamume
Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title_full Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title_fullStr Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title_full_unstemmed Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title_short Type 1A Endoleak after TEVAR in the Aortic Arch: A Review of the Literature
title_sort type 1a endoleak after tevar in the aortic arch: a review of the literature
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9410239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36013228
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12081279
work_keys_str_mv AT scurtolucia type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT pelusonicolo type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT pascuccifederico type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT sicasimona type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT denigrisfrancesca type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT filipponimarco type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT minellifabrizio type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT donatitommaso type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT tinelligiovanni type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature
AT tshombayamume type1aendoleakaftertevarintheaorticarchareviewoftheliterature